No. I think your assessment is imbalanced, and I think that's part of the problem with Canadian foreign policy right now. Everything I heard you say was a composite of what's wrong with Venezuela. And it is; all those things you mentioned are true. But I didn't hear you mention anything positive. When I hear people mention only the negative and not the positive, I sense an imbalance that's dangerous and that entrenches polarization and that works against conflict resolution.
When I compare it to Colombia, I compare it only in a sense of context. I think these problems are problems. I think it's a problem that Chavez is a megalomaniac. I think there is a problem with all those things you mentioned, in part, but we have to look at it in the context of what are the positive achievements.
One of the things that very much worry me in terms of the broader picture of Canadian foreign policy is that we have been viewed, more and more, as an appendage of the United States without an independent policy. Instead of the kind of even-handed approach we have taken before that has allowed us to be a mediator of conflict with Cuba and that has allowed us to be a mediator of conflict with Central America, if we dig in our heels and entrench, and if we turn a blind eye to one country--to Colombia, say--and see only the negative in Venezuela, I would find that very dangerous.